I wonder if Camelot would file a copyright infringement lawsuit against Incentive for copying its lawsuit (though, (1) I doubt that Camelot registered its lawsuit and (2) there would be reasonable claims that much of the copied parts were not subject to copyright). Still, the whole thing is kind of amusing (assuming you're not one of the 5,865 being sued twice).

God praise thee copyright

It's good that we have copyright to protect such embattled forms of artistic expression as b-grade. nunspoitation revenge movies. This heaven-sanctified genre is barely surviving, due to the demonic threat of pirates, almost impelling a person to take action in the way of the films noble protagonist and dress up as a nun and hunt down all of those 5,865 infringers one by one.

I just got here...

Tied up at work and all that. Is it too late to stake a claim as the "exclusive United States distributor of the motion picture titled Nuns with Guns"?

I'm more than willing to get in on one of the few movies to make nearly all of its money in the courtroom rather than the theater. I can even provide various nuns and/or guns should they be needed for evidence. At least, I assume I can. If I get a school bus and some guns, the rest should all go off without a hitch.

Re: Re: Re: It's the little things

Actually, in Israel there were several suits regarding copyright in legal documents

Well,

Under Israeli law, there were four prominent cases involved lawyers copying from other lawyers their suits. In three cases the courts ruled that the defendants violated copyright (Calderon v. Alon, Azgad v. Shpiglman and Goldhammer v. Segal) and rejected in once (Soroker-Agmon v. Artman).

The case of Artman was different as the court acknowledged that there are certain legal documents that lack originality. It was quite interesting to find out, and might be of interest here.